With all due respect, there is no rule that requires the finder of fact in an NCAA proceeding or even a criminal trial to be an absolute moron or a rule that prevents deductive reasoning. He is on tape stating that he made such an offer to a recruit that ended up at his school. The trier of fact can deduce from that that an offer was in fact made and accepted. Personally I don’t care either way. CBB has no saints, only those who get caught and those who don’t.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by piggilicious

Member since Jan 2011

37299 posts

Posted on 3/10/22 at 7:58 pm to SquaringCircles

quote:
With all due respect, there is no rule that requires the finder of fact in an NCAA proceeding or even a criminal trial to be an absolute moron or a rule that prevents deductive reasoning. He is on tape stating that he made such an offer to a recruit that ended up at his school. The trier of fact can deduce from that that an offer was in fact made and accepted. Personally I don’t care either way. CBB has no saints, only those who get caught and those who don’t.

I need your phone number or email address - next time I need to perfectly state something you’re my go to.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by LSUgrad88

Member since Jun 2009

6864 posts

Posted on 3/10/22 at 9:19 pm to SquaringCircles

quote:
or a rule that prevents deductive reasoning. He is on tape stating that he made such an offer to a recruit that ended up at his school.

To be accurate he is on tape complaining that the “strong arse offer” he made to Smart was not enough. Which, using this deductive reasoning, would clearly imply someone at that time had made an even “stronger arse offer.” The only other team in the Smart sweepstakes was Kentucky, so what would you deduce from that?

This post was edited on 3/10/22 at 9:21 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by TigerLunatik